Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative study between ultrasound, computed tomography, intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography, and magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of tumors of the liver

  • Published:
Gastrointestinal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Forty-one patients with liver tumor have been evaluated with ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (IA-DSA), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in order to establish the accuracy of each technique. In group A (24 patients), in which all four imaging modalities were performed, our results show that MRI detected all hemangiomas (25/25) compared to 22/25, 21/25, and 20/25 with US, CT, and IA-DSA, respectively. No difference between the various methods was seen in the case of hepatoma. Finally, in the patients with metastases, all four techniques had the same sensitivity (100%) but the specificity of MRI was also 100%, compared to 33% for IA-DSA and 66% for US and CT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Itai Y, Ohtomo K, Araki T, Furui S, Lio M, Atomi Y: Computed tomography and sonography of cavernous haemangioma of the liver.AJR 141:315–320, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  2. Freeny PF, Marks WM: Patterns of contrast enhancement of benign and malignant hepatic neoplasms during bolus dynamic CT scanning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Washington DC, November 1984

  3. Stark DD, Felder RC, Wittenberg J, Sainis S, et al.: Magnetic resonance imaging of cavernous haemangioma of the liver: tissue-specific characterization.AJR 145:213–222, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  4. Moss AA, Goldberg HI, Stark DD, Davis PL, Margulis AR, Kaufman L, Crooks LE: Hepatic tumors: magnetic resonance and CT appearance.Radiology 150:141–147, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  5. Reining JW, Dwyer AJ, Miller DL, et al.: Liver metastasis detection: comparative sensitivities of MR imaging and CT scanning.Radiology 162:43–47, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ferrucci JT Jr: MR imaging of the liver.AJR 147:1103–1110, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wittenberg J, Stark DD, Forman BH, et al.: Differentiation of hepatic metastases from hepatic haemangiomas and cysts by using MR imaging.AJR 151:79–84, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  8. Heiken JP, Lee JKT, Glazer HS, Lign D: Hepatic metastasis studied with MR and CT.Radiology 16:423–427, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  9. Adson MA: Surgery Symposium. Mass lesions of the liver.Mayo Clin Proc 61:362–368, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  10. Glazer GM, Aisen AM, Francis IR, et al.: Evaluation of focal hepatic masses: a comparative study of MRI and CT.Gastrointestinal Radiol 11:263–268, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rummeny E, Sainis S, Weissleder R, et al.: Differential diagnosis of hepatic haemangiomas and malignant lesions by MR imaging. Paper presented at the 2nd European Congress of NMR in Medicine and Biology, Berlin, June 1988

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vlachos, L., Trakadas, S., Gouliamos, A. et al. Comparative study between ultrasound, computed tomography, intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography, and magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of tumors of the liver. Gastrointest Radiol 15, 102–106 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01888749

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01888749

Key words

Navigation